religion is abomination, repent and believe the gospel
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
@adamb20102010 Mark 16:16-18 are all additions to Mark much later. At least learn the history of the bible if your going to pretend it was the work of a god. SAD
this is why people were better looking in those days , first of all they had a classier better sense of style and also its all in black and white which makes people appear beautiful
If i were to say what Russell says in my own words it would come out as 'Religious dogma is complete and utter bullshit, most religious people's beliefs about religious dogma are bullshit and most religious people's beliefs about atheists and agnostics are bullshit'. I love how polite he is.
the sad thing is that even if people didn't have a belief in science or religion people would still be arguing and killing each other because people can't seem to get along or settle their differences.
@zarth4 I agree, but I can understand when people kill eachother over power or resources. Then atlest people have an understandable motive. It is killing for an imaginary god I don't understand.
@zarth4 I hope that one day we will evolve to work in one big group. We already have the group mentality, but we also have the, "My group is better than yours," mentality as well.
That's a very stupid generalization. You can't call that an inferiority complex issue. Certain religious groups deny logic, rationality and facts, those groups are ignorant and arrogant - they almost always take a very extreme stand on topics which are beyond their scope and knowledge. I would never invite their stupidity to take part in the shaping of our world as that would certainly lead to catastrophies as it has done invariably in the past.
@whatshendrix The U.S. and most other governments work on a system of checks and balances. Many things in this world do. We should always question ourselves and we shouldn't all agree on everything. Each should have their fair say, and it should be a group consensus. You may not be expressly admitting to hating free speech, but you are implying it. You have to be some kind of ignorant to say such a thing with people trying to block your right to free speech. Come on now...
I'm not talking about free speech, nor would I ever stand for censorship. I'm shocked at how much you can misinterpret something so simple.
Let me chew my post down so you would understand it - rational people can't work together with religious people, because religious people stick to what has been proven to be harmful and wrong. Having them run our world is the same as having an illiterate read you a poem.
@whatshendrix I'm not talking about the stupid religious people, I'm talking about people that are religious and play "Devil's advocate." It is always good to have some sort of opposition. There should always be some sort of opposition. You don't have to break things down for me. I understand what you're saying completely. Never should a person's opinion be automatically disregarded based on their religious beliefs, which is what you want.
I want nothing of the kind, I would never engage in an ad hominem. You keep putting words in my mouth.
I'm not talking about banning opposition... I simply gave you an example of people not working together NOT because each group likes to feel superrior to the other, but rather because one is irrational and always makes a huge mess of things while the other relies on rationality to constantly figure things out.
@whatshendrix I am starting to see where you're coming from, but you're still overgeneralizing. Like I said, there are rational Christians. I personally know a couple of them. They are fairly intelligent people, but they have been indoctrinated so badly in their youth that it is inescapable. I agree with you except on that one idea. I too believe that we should make rational decisions, but that doesn't mean automatically cutting out everybody that believes in a God.
I know that this sounds like a rough generalization, that's why I said "certain religious groups". I didn't mean to generalize, I aimed to illustrate my point, it shouldn't be taken literally. I do realize that there are all kinds of people who believe in God and I do realize that a good deal of them are thinkers.
@whatshendrix Okay. It was nice debating with you. I would have to respectfully accept my defeat. If it is any consolation to myself, I am still only 17 and still have much more to learn. Thank you for being part of that process!
@whatshendrix Thanks. I would like to vent a bit, though. Most of my classmates are so incredibly misinformed and are just bad thinkers in general. It irritates me to no end that they just don't seem to care. This is all we have! If this is all we have, it seems pretty important to find the truth! GGGGGAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!! Oh well. I'm done now! :3
Yep, I know how that feels. We thinkers are a somewhat rare breed, becoming rarer and rarer. I think society in general is in puberty right now, but sooner or later the mistakes will build up and people will start caring and open their eyes and we WILL mature as a whole.
@whatshendrix For example, my parents are both Christians, but they believe in evolution. That is very much possible and even popes have done this. There are rational people who participate in religious activities. This minority would be automatically shut up under your conditions.
People MUST voice their views and debate them until a consensus is reached, we need free speech ESPECIALLY when we disagree. You can't reach a consensus with religious people simply because they have no understanding of logic and rational thought. THAT is why we can't work with them.
@zarth4 Absolutely true. The only problem is that religion is the ultimate excuse to get away with everything humans want to do but are expected not to do in a cooperative society. Who can disagree with your thoughts or actions when they come from God's orders? That's the danger of religion. But yeah, human nature is never gonna change.
@PrivateJoker17 this is just the retarded youtube comment section where i don't give a fuck. also english is my secound language. but you understand what i was trying to say no metter if i write it with v or f. if you're really unable to understand just because of that one letter maybe you should pay more attention.
@PrivateJoker17 this is just the retarded youtube comment section where i don't give a f. also english is my secound language. but you understand what i was trying to say no metter if i write it with v or f. if you're really unable to understand just because of that one letter maybe you should pay more attention.
@PrivateJoker17 this is just the retarded youtube comment section where i don't give a f. also english is my secound language. but you understand what i was trying to say no metter if i write it with v or f. if you're really unable to understand just because of that one letter maybe you should pay more attention.
"the ordinary person", (with a self deprecating gesture towards herself) - perhaps she just meant "non philosopher", or "person not intellectually inclined". But i cant help feeling that she meant "commoner and non genius, (unlike you, lord Russell)". Maybe its just me ...
god exists...... our faith is always challenged,,,,, and those who look for physical proof are atheists,,,,, much easier to not believe than to believe.....
death is only the beginning of everlasting life...
@fairhillnorrie Why would I believe what some other human being (Whose brain is no bigger or better than my own) who tells me, he knows what happens when I die!
@fairhillnorrie Could you explain which god are you referring to, please?
There are hundreds of thousands to choose from. For example the Jewish & Muslim sects & the Christian cult which comprise the Abrahamic religion have loads they stole from the Mesopotamians, like the storm god Jehovah, the animal gods the Cherubim & Seraphim (though they call them 'angels' or messengers), Ba'al, Belial, etc. The Hindus have quite a few, as does Asatru, Hellenism & numerous other religions.
@catalyst8 there is only one true creator.... people choose to follow different religions have different beliefs etc.... but my god is the god of all people despite peoples differences..... it dose not matter once you believe in a creator of all things not only here on earth but throughout the universe
You are brain washed, there is no way you can believe there is a creator, you would not if you were told, just accept that and grow up. I could have an intelligent argument with you. But I am done arguing with people who do not believe in evidence, its just too annoying
This guy looks like Jed Clampets cousin in the video, look at him closely.....Can't you picture the hat, and the hill-side get up, jacket and all on him? Maybe even do that Jed Clampett jig, now that's the stuff. Weeeeeee DOGGY!! (Banjo plays)
@Yasha39 No need to look up anything, i run this ship, not anybody else. Next off, sorry, but he looks like Jedd Clampets cousin, i would have loved to see him that get up, doin a jig, i laugh whenever i see this guy when i think about that. Sorry
Man people are just beginning to understanding how we can have morality without God today, and in the U.S. they still don't understand that. This man was a sheer genius!
Sagan said it best, all religious forms of theism are our species' elementary attempts at understanding existence. Sure, after the scientific method was adopted we should have suspended all beliefs on the existence of God until something came forward to present it's validity, but evolution is still a boon to teach in school because creationists refuse to evolve. At some point every 'rational' individual has to abandon superstition for evidence, because it clearly is more logical.
Good old Bertie, what a dude, but he should hear what god said about him! Also there is nothing logically valid about believing that hairstyle is appropriate and from observing this video there is no evidence for the existence of a comb, but they are real!
This from a guy would thought it was impossible to go to the moon, that there would never be personal computers, etc. So just because he didn't believe in it that makes it a reality. Wow can you say self absorbed, self centered, etc. Many things of that era weren't possible and science didn't believe they were possible. It's great that others weren't so pig headed and blind. He's of the realm that if it can't be contained in a formula it's not true. What about love. No formula for that.
@1timby Since the premises of religion are false, the same evidence for it's claims of god(s) were as available in 1959 C.E as they were in 1959 B.C.E; and they are likely to remain so. In spite of any criticisms you may have of Russell, he is spot on here. And the love bit? 0:11 Talk about stock arguments!
@clacsonornamental Since all science is based on conjecture & unsubstantiated facts (evolution & creation) your opinions are just that wrong. This guy was full of hot air and pomp. Just because he didn't think doesn't make it so. Lots of things don't just add up in an equation. Don't make them less credible. Yes lets talk stock arguments.
@Managasm Why? Because not everyone will agree on what is "rational morality" It varies greatly around the planet. Some horrific things are considered rational in some cultures. Some cultures think our moralities are not rational. This leads to chaos...and often times mass bloodshed.
Rational morality must be based on science! The tyrants always believe their morality is rational...Therefore the reason for the atrocities of the past isn't the rational morality but the tyranny of very few.
I don't understand your point. Some of the cultures who consider 'horrific things' rationale are in fact religious ones, who follow a God figure and proclaim their morality to be divine truth.
"If some lucky men survive the onslaught of the third world war of atomic and hydrogen bombs, then the Sikh religion will be the only means of guiding them."
Isn't this religion capable of guiding mankind before the third world war?
"Yes, it has the capability, but the Sikhs have not brought out in the broad daylight, the splendid doctrines of this religion which has come into existence for the benefit of the entire mankind. This is their greatest sin and the Sikhs cannot be freed of it." B.R.
If your theistic belief doesn't accommodate what all scientific endeavor is finding, at some point you HAVE to realize the fault is not with science, but lies within the ancient superstition surrounding your belief. There's nothing logical about intellectual suicide, but it happens daily when theists reject evidence for ancient mythology.
If you use other peoples' philosophy to justify your own predispositions you're still left without subjective justification for your belief. In the end, that's all religious people are doing, finding material that justifies their predispositions so that when cornered, they have names and quotes to throw around.
Sadly, there are far more than 255 morons in the world. The 255 here just happened to stumble on this video, probably in talking to people that aren't morons.
And who in the hell is capable of evaluating brilliance anyway? Isn't that a subjective conclusion? Are you saying that because a brilliant man was catholic that Catholicism is right? So if Einstein was a Scientologist you'd be wearing an L Ron Hubbard shirt?
@bodaciousbw "Are you saying that because a brilliant man was catholic that Catholicism is right?" No, if you read what I wrote, I'm saying that if a brilliant man was a Theist, there is nothing inherently foolish or stupid about Theism. Try reading, it will improve the quality of your responses.
You're pretty much saying you believe in god because other intelligent people do, that's ridiculous. I'm sure there are atheists out there because Carl Sagan was an atheist, but those people need to find critical thinking skill before they (you) even contemplate these questions
@bodaciousbw I said nothing of the kind. Here, read it again: "Wittgenstein was a devout Catholic." My implication was that there is nothing inherently foolish or stupid about Theism.
Russell himself admitted that Wittgenstein was far more brilliant than he. Oh, by the way, Wittgenstein was a devout Catholic. What were you saying about Theism being a stupid belief?
@kmsoileau Plenty of smart people can't drive worth a damn, I wouldn't ask them for driving lessons because they were a brain surgeon. It's hardly relevant if someone who is brilliant in one field believes something ridiculous in another.
@aluisious "I wouldn't ask them for driving lessons because they were a brain surgeon." I see. You don't respect Wittgenstein's opinion on a question of philosophy because...wait for it...he was a philosopher!
@kmsoileau You think Wittgenstein knows anything more about his religious book than anyone else that has actually read it? Does his brilliance somehow shed light on an ancient piece of mashed-together literature, that you, your friends, family, and preacher are incapable of? No. Anyone that reads the book can find the internal inconsistencies. Anyone that reads the book, and other books can find the external inconsistencies. Anyone with half a mind rejects the book at that point.
@Rytzch Regarding the most important philosopher of the 20th century, with an estimated IQ of around 190, it's rational to assume he read it and understood what he was reading.
"Does his brilliance somehow shed light on an ancient piece of mashed-together literature, that you, your friends, family, and preacher are incapable of?" Does your mental mediocrity explain your inability to comprehend the Bible? Yes.
"Anyone with half a mind rejects the book at that point." Yes. You, for example.
@kmsoileau You sound like you're mad that people are rejecting your religion. Why does that make you mad? If you believed it was true, it would be irrelevant what others thought of it.
@kmsoileau You honestly have no idea what my IQ is, but you seem dead-set on keeping yourself in the lower end of the 2-digit category. If you cannot spot the obvious inconsistencies that your genius philosopher (i.e., practitioner of abstract thought... not exactly a powerhouse of reason) also was unable to, that's fine. The fact that they're there is well-documented. You can google search for it, and also google search for the verses in question. I await your apology.
@kmsoileau You're a clown, even if you admit to exaggerating there. I'm well above average, and even well above most people considered "smart". The fact that you cannot argue your point without resorting to argument from authority, and argumentum ad hominem shows me that you are incapable of understanding, and arguing for, your bible. Sorry for the delay, seems I missed the proper reply button.
@Rytzch You're a clown, even if you admit to exaggerating there. I'm well above average, and even well above most people considered "smart". The fact that you cannot argue your point without resorting to argument from authority, and argumentum ad hominem shows me that you are incapable of understanding, and arguing for, your bible.
Just so you know man, argument from authority is called argumentum ad verecundiam and is considered to be a legitimate inductive argument in some cases, not saying this is necessarily one of them, but just wanted to point that out
@kmsoileau 'Russell himself admitted that Wittgenstein was far more brilliant than he.'
What you've got there is a logical fallacy; you're addressing the person not the argument, in this case it's an unqualified appeal to authority. If you want to make a point that Russell is wrong then you need to explain why.
@catalyst8 "What you've got there is a logical fallacy; you're addressing the person not the argument, in this case it's an unqualified appeal to authority."
Not really. The video I was responding to wasn't a reasoned argument, it was the presentation of an authority (Bertrand Russell). So I presented a counter-authority (Ludwig Wittgenstein). Further, I don't claim that Wittgenstein's being a Catholic proves Theism is right, only that Theism isn't stupid or foolish.
Any philosophy which is not based on evidence (Empirical Evidence) is nonsense including religion, no matter how eloquently one defends it. Th fact is there is no evidence whatsoever about the existence of deity! Why any rational person believe in this irrational and foolish philosophy?
Historical evidence and the experience of humanity in the last 300 years since the introduction of the greatest minds of this planet, who invented the Scientific Method. What is the evidence that science work? Look around you...
@lachezar43 The question isn't whether science works, the issue is your claim that "Any philosophy which is not based on evidence (Empirical Evidence) is nonsense" Where is your evidence of THAT claim?
I answered your question. There is no philosophy, which I know of, to have provided so much advancements in our lives besides science. So, my statement that we do not know any philosophy introduced in previous epochs that really advances knowledge and is not based on evidence. It's just a fact. I might be wrong. I'll be most happy if you show me such philosophy and refute my argument.
@lachezar43 "I answered your question." Uh, no you didn't You claimed something was "nonsense." Now you're running away from a request for evidence that is is nonsense?
I said it's nonsense because I Thought it is patently wrong... Why should anyone believe in philosophy which is not based on evidence? It is not rational to do so. My evidence that it is not rational is obvious - you could believe in virtually everything as long as it appears logically coherent. But any logic is based on premises. These premises interfere with our bias and ignorance! Science is not just a body of knowledge. It is a way of thinking it recognize this fallacy.
It's nice you bring this up. I'm a physicist. Axioms which do not come from experiments are not science and nobody (except some mathematicians) consider them serious. Mathematics is just a tool that works. In the moments it stops working we'll discard it. Therefore our Application of mathematics is not based on pure ''faith'' but on evidence and experience! Our axioms as well ;) Read Richard Feynman's lectures on Electrodynamics. In the beginning he speaks a little about mathematics.
@lachezar43 I noticed you ignored the substance of my post. Logic itself does not come from experiments, but the scientific method is founded on it. LOL, thanks for the laugh!
I'm sorry I didn't want to offend you. This symbol ;) isn't a laughter. But no matter. Please read a great book, that I hope will provide you immense pleasure - Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan. Then you will understand what scientific method is. I'm not arguing to abandon logic. But science is the Union of Logic and Experiments (Testing the logic). I only say that pure logical philosophies cannot gain knowledge about the world. This is why ultimately the Greek science failed!
@lachezar43 "Then you will understand what scientific method is." I don't need to read Sagan's book to know what the scientific method is. You need to read a book on logic to understand what logic is. Then you'll realize that logic is not based on evidence (meaning that the validity of logic is unaffected by the accumulation of evidence, thus is independent of evidence), and thus since logic is not "nonsense", there does indeed exist something not based on evidence, yet is not nonsense.
@kmsoileau Meaning is something that gives life worth i.e. what keeps you going. I'm not sure how I can make that any more clear. God does that for some, and for others rollerblading does it. It doesn't matter whether your fulfillment comes from recreation or a job or raising a family. Rollerblading is just one example, thus the inclusion of the ad infinitum at the end.
Put the question itself on the pedestal, come to the realization that the answer is irrelevant. We're along for the ride drifting both lazily and violently though the infinite expanse of a cosmic ocean asking each other why, that in itself is beautiful.
There IS something instead of nothing, evolution IS a thing, a religious god is definitely the product of our species' elementary attempts to make sense of our existence but the fact remains, we exist in spite of probability. 'it's the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it' all beliefs on either extreme answering the question of God are premature, both idealists and realists exist because the question still exists, the question still exists because we still exist
There you have it ladies and gentlemen. One of the two writers of Principia Mathmatica, and the most important philosopher of the 20th century and one of my personal heroes rejects God wholeheartedly.
@assassin465 Math is necessary for science and engineering, which is always a good future. Believe me it's worse to be old and under-qualified than young and spending your time on math homework.
Believing in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny are fun! They enhance existence! As an agnostic I feel a relationship with the idea of God is a beautiful addition to existence...even if that is a metaphorical relationship!
@jimdivax If you think about it, people lie their children about santa and that bunny thing to give them happiness. Believing in God is kind of like believing santa, it's happiness built upon a lie, because the scary truth of what happens when you die is very hard to accept for many.
@warriorofguitar The difference between believing in Santa and God is that God instructs people in the Holy Books to kill people for no good reason, and enforces a flawed morality in his many commandments (not just "the 10"). People kill over God because the holy books give them license. Nobody kills over Santa because a belief in him is not a dogmatic one and doesn't imply the many things that the Holy books do. In any case, I don't respect the reasoning of someone who believes in Santa either.
If there's no god, then we are all just smart animals and "intellectual integrity" and "honesty" are meaningless, artificial concepts used as tools to keep human behavior more predictable and easier to control.
@kmsoileau Those concepts are only "meaningless" if you believe what is man made has no meaning/ or lesser value than something that is given by a god. However as a reductionist I feel there is no reason to get to this high level of abstraction to argue about the existance of a god when a rational individual can simply deduce the false nature of Religious doctrine. I am not saying all theists enjoy the smoke and mirrors of conceptual abstraction, but confusion does aid their argument.
@chriswads If there is no god, then man is just a smart animal and indeed "what is man made has no meaning" in exactly the same way that what is monkey-made or what is ant-made has no meaning. The rest of your post is just an attempt at distraction by introducing religion.
@kmsoileau I understand what you're saying, but I don't think the absence of God dissolves the "meaning" of human ideas, concepts, and actions. If there is a higher power accompanied by an afterlife then certainly our actions might carry over into the next. But ignoring the speculative nature of guessing whether eating beans will cause us to go to hell, human creations (philosophy, art, science) give meaning to humanity and will exist as long as humanity does.
@mma9900 "human creations (philosophy, art, science) give meaning to humanity" I'm sure you believe that human creations are somehow "special" and have "meaning", but if we are just animals, what does "meaning" mean?
@kmsoileau Not even God could accurately explain what "meaning" means in less than 500 characters. I would not consider human creations special if bears had found a way to launch themselves into space or monkeys had built the Parthenon. But they haven't. One shits in the woods, the other throws shit at its friends. Certainly humans are capable of this but they are also capable of much more.
@mma9900 "launch themselves into space" LOL So what? Chimps use tools. Does that mean their creation of tools have meaning? Yes, our accomplishments are impressive, and are more advanced than those of other animals. But if atheism is correct, we're still just animals. Deal with it.
@kmsoileau I'm aware that I'm an animal. I share the same biological processes such as eating, sleeping, dieing, and the occasional mating ritual which takes place after I perform an elaborate dance. However, unlike the animal I can create with a purpose other than survival. Whether or not the creation is impressive is irrelevant. You need to read a happy poem or something. Calling everything meaningless would tend to make me depressed.
@kmsoileau "Certainly humans are capable of this..." Sometimes when I get angry and read I skip over things. I assume that's what happened in your case.
@kmsoileau Who ever said I was an atheist? I just don't think that in the absence of God everything is without meaning. Should I die and find myself being interrogated at the heavenly gates about all the times I got drunk in college, I won't suddenly think to myself, "Man, life really wasn't meaningless after all." Should the opposite occur whereby there is no heaven, I won't know any better. Good luck telling them atheists off!
@mma9900 " I just don't think that in the absence of God everything is without meaning" LOL, fine, just explain how human animals have meaning and chimps don't.
@kmsoileau I assume that you're prefacing your question on the hypothetical scenario of there being no God (thus the whole life is meaningless schtick). Chimps find meaning in survival (or throwing poop at zoo spectators). Humans find meaning in survival. They also find meaning in rollerblading, writing, painting, football, commenting on youtube, Christmas, protesting the establishment, and so on ad infinitum. Get my drift. Both find meaning, ours in a more complicated way.
@kmsoileau Not a "distraction". A reductionist searches for the most basic level of knowledge, a bit like Descartes. If we conclude that there is no God, your argument becomes invalid and not worth having. For why speak of something that is given meaning by something that doesnt exist? Your point is valid to a point, but only by accepting things that are not true can it be completely valid, therefore it is not a discussion worth having. :) have a nice day though
@kmsoileau Is that so hard to accept? And even if there was a god, we'd still be pretty meaningless, because god would be meaningless without a god. Hell, there's no meaning for the universe to even be here, it just is.
HIS WORDS , " BY THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN I WAS DONE MY REVUE OF CHRISTIANITY , AND DISCARDED WHAT WAS USELESS ", I'M AFRAID YOU CAN NEVER DISCARD ANY DOGMA YOU DONE A 13 YEAR STUDY ON.YOUR ALREADY INFECTED. AS FAR AS NOT BELIEVING IN AFTERLIFE , IN THE END ALL OF US GO INTO DEATH WITH RELIEF , BROUGHT BY HOPE .HOPE THAT IT'S THERE.
@TrollLowLow This old coot believed in god, a catholic priest made him reject his own atheistic beliefs and said all atheists are illogical. He knows there is a god he called himself an agnostic to avoid embarrassment he was a coward.
@Nacirema6969 - Certainly, you have a name of this priest who "made him reject his own atheistic beliefs"? I mean, we're not talking about the Inquisition here, as Russell died in 1970, and his life was among the most chronicled of the 20th Century.
Who was this priest that you claim to be responsible for Russell's conversion?
@lowtalkerr If you aren't a christian then you know nothing about philosophy or natural science. You don't believe what you can't see with your eyes, just think of all the millions of particles that make up your body that you cannot see. You may be infested with parasite yet believe you are completely healthy, 40% of americans have pin worms. If outside of the USA look it up yourself.
@Nacirema6969 That makes no sense at all, why would being a Christian give me a deeper knowledge of Philosophy and natural science?! lol. I have read the Bible though, so essentially my "christian" knowledge is on par with most Christians. But yeah, i still don't get your point...........at all.
@lowtalkerr Yep you're a child aren't you? You aren't listening to a word i am saying. I never said being a christian would make you smarter. If you were smart you would be a christian. Being an atheist is illogical. Look up Bertrand Russel vs Frederick Copleston.
Bertrand Russell was a stud. He highlights perfectly how detached religion is from an honest pursuit of truth (or at least the very best we can manage at discovering truth). It always amazes me how often religious people appeal to "social benefits" as an argument or reason to believe it. It's utterly irrelevant. Believe something only if you think it is TRUE! They love to throw the word (truth) around so much, yet they seem to have an utter lack of respect for it.
Russell couldn't even comprehend the mind of Nietzsche, it's foolish to think he could comprehend the mind of God.
"You say that I am wise, but the truth is God only is wise; and in this oracle he means to say that the wisdom of men is little or nothing." ~Socrates.
@DaFoxx28 So in other words: no. They say "on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog", well in your case, a monkey tapping keys at random would make more sense than you. Look pal, If you're going to attempt to play the dozens, at least try to be entertaining, "Yo mama" jokes are really droll. It shows that you have a underdeveloped intellect that cannot express itself adequately. Seek help.
@DaFoxx28 I see you must be a little boy who's got access to a computer. Tell you what I'm going to do since you are a troll. I'm going to just ignore your monkey mail. You see, you're just like a monkey in the cage that flings dung and screeches, but you're still a monkey in a cage. So monk, this is my last response to you. Don't forget to wash your hands before handling food, or you might get sick and die. Which would be a boon to mankind.
@DAngelo136 Hey, Tonto, aka onewarriordragoons side-kick. Go wipe your grannys ass, she needs it. I got more than access to a computer. I have full access to your mothers CPU with my HARD drive boy, now read it and weep, ya weak sheep. Ok run along Dangeload. : )
Bertrand Russell. If only 10% of the world saw things like he did, it wouldn't be so fucked up.
carioca56 7 hours ago 2
@carioca56 True.
zigifrojd 6 hours ago
religion is abomination, repent and believe the gospel
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
adamb20102010 13 hours ago
@adamb20102010 Mark 16:16-18 are all additions to Mark much later. At least learn the history of the bible if your going to pretend it was the work of a god. SAD
MitchStarRepublic 4 hours ago
this is why people were better looking in those days , first of all they had a classier better sense of style and also its all in black and white which makes people appear beautiful
LanzoEmilia 19 hours ago
Comment removed
LanzoEmilia 19 hours ago
If i were to say what Russell says in my own words it would come out as 'Religious dogma is complete and utter bullshit, most religious people's beliefs about religious dogma are bullshit and most religious people's beliefs about atheists and agnostics are bullshit'. I love how polite he is.
Neall07 1 day ago
Absolutely amazing. His comments are so pithily yet politely put.
LavLTC 1 day ago
This guy is awesooooome!!!!
elfypooh 1 day ago
I want more of this interview
fjollornaz 1 day ago
Boss
BoutrasBoutrasGhali 1 day ago
Atheists today are the pioneers of the future.
aaadddd1000 2 days ago
@aaadddd1000
Pioneers of what?
Managasm 2 days ago
@Managasm logic, reason, critical thinking, things like that.
donaldinasweater 1 day ago
the sad thing is that even if people didn't have a belief in science or religion people would still be arguing and killing each other because people can't seem to get along or settle their differences.
zarth4 2 days ago 10
@zarth4 But it would be one less cause for conflict. Then we could put more effort into resolving the others.
MrRussellSparrow 1 day ago
@zarth4 I agree, but I can understand when people kill eachother over power or resources. Then atlest people have an understandable motive. It is killing for an imaginary god I don't understand.
ikosabre 1 day ago
@zarth4 I hope that one day we will evolve to work in one big group. We already have the group mentality, but we also have the, "My group is better than yours," mentality as well.
TheWhiteShadow42 22 hours ago
@TheWhiteShadow42
That's a very stupid generalization. You can't call that an inferiority complex issue. Certain religious groups deny logic, rationality and facts, those groups are ignorant and arrogant - they almost always take a very extreme stand on topics which are beyond their scope and knowledge. I would never invite their stupidity to take part in the shaping of our world as that would certainly lead to catastrophies as it has done invariably in the past.
whatshendrix 21 hours ago
@whatshendrix The U.S. and most other governments work on a system of checks and balances. Many things in this world do. We should always question ourselves and we shouldn't all agree on everything. Each should have their fair say, and it should be a group consensus. You may not be expressly admitting to hating free speech, but you are implying it. You have to be some kind of ignorant to say such a thing with people trying to block your right to free speech. Come on now...
TheWhiteShadow42 20 hours ago
@TheWhiteShadow42
I'm not talking about free speech, nor would I ever stand for censorship. I'm shocked at how much you can misinterpret something so simple.
Let me chew my post down so you would understand it - rational people can't work together with religious people, because religious people stick to what has been proven to be harmful and wrong. Having them run our world is the same as having an illiterate read you a poem.
whatshendrix 20 hours ago
@whatshendrix I'm not talking about the stupid religious people, I'm talking about people that are religious and play "Devil's advocate." It is always good to have some sort of opposition. There should always be some sort of opposition. You don't have to break things down for me. I understand what you're saying completely. Never should a person's opinion be automatically disregarded based on their religious beliefs, which is what you want.
TheWhiteShadow42 19 hours ago
@TheWhiteShadow42
I want nothing of the kind, I would never engage in an ad hominem. You keep putting words in my mouth.
I'm not talking about banning opposition... I simply gave you an example of people not working together NOT because each group likes to feel superrior to the other, but rather because one is irrational and always makes a huge mess of things while the other relies on rationality to constantly figure things out.
whatshendrix 19 hours ago
@whatshendrix I am starting to see where you're coming from, but you're still overgeneralizing. Like I said, there are rational Christians. I personally know a couple of them. They are fairly intelligent people, but they have been indoctrinated so badly in their youth that it is inescapable. I agree with you except on that one idea. I too believe that we should make rational decisions, but that doesn't mean automatically cutting out everybody that believes in a God.
TheWhiteShadow42 18 hours ago
@TheWhiteShadow42
I know that this sounds like a rough generalization, that's why I said "certain religious groups". I didn't mean to generalize, I aimed to illustrate my point, it shouldn't be taken literally. I do realize that there are all kinds of people who believe in God and I do realize that a good deal of them are thinkers.
whatshendrix 17 hours ago
@whatshendrix Okay. It was nice debating with you. I would have to respectfully accept my defeat. If it is any consolation to myself, I am still only 17 and still have much more to learn. Thank you for being part of that process!
TheWhiteShadow42 17 hours ago
@TheWhiteShadow42
It's refreshing to have a mature conversation like that on YT. Best of luck to you :)
whatshendrix 17 hours ago
@whatshendrix Thanks. I would like to vent a bit, though. Most of my classmates are so incredibly misinformed and are just bad thinkers in general. It irritates me to no end that they just don't seem to care. This is all we have! If this is all we have, it seems pretty important to find the truth! GGGGGAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!! Oh well. I'm done now! :3
TheWhiteShadow42 17 hours ago
Comment removed
whatshendrix 17 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheWhiteShadow42
Yep, I know how that feels. We thinkers are a somewhat rare breed, becoming rarer and rarer. I think society in general is in puberty right now, but sooner or later the mistakes will build up and people will start caring and open their eyes and we WILL mature as a whole.
whatshendrix 17 hours ago
@whatshendrix For example, my parents are both Christians, but they believe in evolution. That is very much possible and even popes have done this. There are rational people who participate in religious activities. This minority would be automatically shut up under your conditions.
TheWhiteShadow42 19 hours ago
@TheWhiteShadow42
People MUST voice their views and debate them until a consensus is reached, we need free speech ESPECIALLY when we disagree. You can't reach a consensus with religious people simply because they have no understanding of logic and rational thought. THAT is why we can't work with them.
whatshendrix 20 hours ago
@TheWhiteShadow42
You have to be fucking insane if you still think I'm against free speech.
whatshendrix 20 hours ago
@zarth4 Absolutely true. The only problem is that religion is the ultimate excuse to get away with everything humans want to do but are expected not to do in a cooperative society. Who can disagree with your thoughts or actions when they come from God's orders? That's the danger of religion. But yeah, human nature is never gonna change.
auroraman56 15 hours ago
How smart is this motherfucker? lol
asianwhitenigger 3 days ago
there can't be a practical for believing something that is untrue
louisuniverse 3 days ago
This man is a legend.
donaldinasweater 3 days ago 16
@donaldinasweater He was a psychopath.
1madaboutguitar 1 day ago
@1madaboutguitar How so?
JoonasFinland 1 day ago
@1madaboutguitar Care to explain, otherwise your comment has no real meaning.
donaldinasweater 1 day ago
one of the greatest polymaths to have ever existed. a true renaissance man.
moralreef 3 days ago
i wish i lifed about 200 years from now in the future
gabrielgabriel2000 3 days ago
@gabrielgabriel2000 *lived. Pay attention in English class. Seriously.
PrivateJoker17 3 days ago
@PrivateJoker17 this is just the retarded youtube comment section where i don't give a fuck. also english is my secound language. but you understand what i was trying to say no metter if i write it with v or f. if you're really unable to understand just because of that one letter maybe you should pay more attention.
gabrielgabriel2000 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PrivateJoker17 this is just the retarded youtube comment section where i don't give a f. also english is my secound language. but you understand what i was trying to say no metter if i write it with v or f. if you're really unable to understand just because of that one letter maybe you should pay more attention.
gabrielgabriel2000 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PrivateJoker17 this is just the retarded youtube comment section where i don't give a f. also english is my secound language. but you understand what i was trying to say no metter if i write it with v or f. if you're really unable to understand just because of that one letter maybe you should pay more attention.
gabrielgabriel2000 3 days ago
@gabrielgabriel2000 ya me too
asianwhitenigger 3 days ago
"the ordinary person", (with a self deprecating gesture towards herself) - perhaps she just meant "non philosopher", or "person not intellectually inclined". But i cant help feeling that she meant "commoner and non genius, (unlike you, lord Russell)". Maybe its just me ...
stilicho2 3 days ago
Russell's reason still stands the test of time. He's one of the greats.
MatticusPrime1 3 days ago
its Parker from Thunderbirds !
chimpcosmic 4 days ago
if you watched this video you are one of the lucky few :)
pokerisometrics 4 days ago
god exists...... our faith is always challenged,,,,, and those who look for physical proof are atheists,,,,, much easier to not believe than to believe.....
death is only the beginning of everlasting life...
we pass over is spiritual form
our physical bodies are no longer needed
keep the faith
fairhillnorrie 4 days ago
@fairhillnorrie Why would any deity make such a stupid mistake in making it easier not to believe than to believe?
Excalibur0551 4 days ago 3
@Excalibur0551 Oh because it's a test.......
xyrxes1 4 days ago
@fairhillnorrie Why would I believe what some other human being (Whose brain is no bigger or better than my own) who tells me, he knows what happens when I die!
nashkita77 4 days ago
@fairhillnorrie Could you explain which god are you referring to, please?
There are hundreds of thousands to choose from. For example the Jewish & Muslim sects & the Christian cult which comprise the Abrahamic religion have loads they stole from the Mesopotamians, like the storm god Jehovah, the animal gods the Cherubim & Seraphim (though they call them 'angels' or messengers), Ba'al, Belial, etc. The Hindus have quite a few, as does Asatru, Hellenism & numerous other religions.
catalyst8 3 days ago
@catalyst8 there is only one true creator.... people choose to follow different religions have different beliefs etc.... but my god is the god of all people despite peoples differences..... it dose not matter once you believe in a creator of all things not only here on earth but throughout the universe
fairhillnorrie 2 days ago
@fairhillnorrie
You are brain washed, there is no way you can believe there is a creator, you would not if you were told, just accept that and grow up. I could have an intelligent argument with you. But I am done arguing with people who do not believe in evidence, its just too annoying
RogerabbitGosu 2 days ago
@RogerabbitGosu dont get upset..... God loved you as well...
fairhillnorrie 1 day ago
@fairhillnorrie
Don't try and be bitter... I guess the priest loved you
RogerabbitGosu 1 day ago
This guy looks like Jed Clampets cousin in the video, look at him closely.....Can't you picture the hat, and the hill-side get up, jacket and all on him? Maybe even do that Jed Clampett jig, now that's the stuff. Weeeeeee DOGGY!! (Banjo plays)
DaFoxx28 4 days ago
@DaFoxx28 That's your comment? How he looks? Dude pleeease.
Look up what "ad hominem" means when you get the chance.
Yasha39 4 days ago
@Yasha39 No need to look up anything, i run this ship, not anybody else. Next off, sorry, but he looks like Jedd Clampets cousin, i would have loved to see him that get up, doin a jig, i laugh whenever i see this guy when i think about that. Sorry
DaFoxx28 4 days ago
If there wasn't a god there would be ne atheists
Ryzee96 4 days ago
Man people are just beginning to understanding how we can have morality without God today, and in the U.S. they still don't understand that. This man was a sheer genius!
fLcGambit 4 days ago
I AGREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
williamcharlesayres 4 days ago
Sagan said it best, all religious forms of theism are our species' elementary attempts at understanding existence. Sure, after the scientific method was adopted we should have suspended all beliefs on the existence of God until something came forward to present it's validity, but evolution is still a boon to teach in school because creationists refuse to evolve. At some point every 'rational' individual has to abandon superstition for evidence, because it clearly is more logical.
bodaciousbw 5 days ago
Good old Bertie, what a dude, but he should hear what god said about him! Also there is nothing logically valid about believing that hairstyle is appropriate and from observing this video there is no evidence for the existence of a comb, but they are real!
TheSoulDoubt 5 days ago
She is bracing herself as if to keep logic and reason at a safe distance.
clacsonornamental 5 days ago
This from a guy would thought it was impossible to go to the moon, that there would never be personal computers, etc. So just because he didn't believe in it that makes it a reality. Wow can you say self absorbed, self centered, etc. Many things of that era weren't possible and science didn't believe they were possible. It's great that others weren't so pig headed and blind. He's of the realm that if it can't be contained in a formula it's not true. What about love. No formula for that.
1timby 5 days ago
@1timby Since the premises of religion are false, the same evidence for it's claims of god(s) were as available in 1959 C.E as they were in 1959 B.C.E; and they are likely to remain so. In spite of any criticisms you may have of Russell, he is spot on here. And the love bit? 0:11 Talk about stock arguments!
clacsonornamental 5 days ago
@clacsonornamental Since all science is based on conjecture & unsubstantiated facts (evolution & creation) your opinions are just that wrong. This guy was full of hot air and pomp. Just because he didn't think doesn't make it so. Lots of things don't just add up in an equation. Don't make them less credible. Yes lets talk stock arguments.
1timby 5 days ago
For the curious, Russell's Nobel is in Literature. There's no Nobel in math (or philosophy for that matter).
pzirejs 5 days ago
@pzirejs The Fields Medal is the corresponding prize for mathematics.
kmsoileau 5 days ago
He doesn't know about heaven, its just him as a person.
ftlqed 5 days ago
@Managasm Why? Because not everyone will agree on what is "rational morality" It varies greatly around the planet. Some horrific things are considered rational in some cultures. Some cultures think our moralities are not rational. This leads to chaos...and often times mass bloodshed.
RadicalMonotheist 5 days ago
@RadicalMonotheist
Rational morality must be based on science! The tyrants always believe their morality is rational...Therefore the reason for the atrocities of the past isn't the rational morality but the tyranny of very few.
lachezar43 5 days ago
@RadicalMonotheist
I don't understand your point. Some of the cultures who consider 'horrific things' rationale are in fact religious ones, who follow a God figure and proclaim their morality to be divine truth.
Managasm 5 days ago
"If some lucky men survive the onslaught of the third world war of atomic and hydrogen bombs, then the Sikh religion will be the only means of guiding them."
Isn't this religion capable of guiding mankind before the third world war?
"Yes, it has the capability, but the Sikhs have not brought out in the broad daylight, the splendid doctrines of this religion which has come into existence for the benefit of the entire mankind. This is their greatest sin and the Sikhs cannot be freed of it." B.R.
DjSonu 5 days ago
If your theistic belief doesn't accommodate what all scientific endeavor is finding, at some point you HAVE to realize the fault is not with science, but lies within the ancient superstition surrounding your belief. There's nothing logical about intellectual suicide, but it happens daily when theists reject evidence for ancient mythology.
bodaciousbw 5 days ago
If you use other peoples' philosophy to justify your own predispositions you're still left without subjective justification for your belief. In the end, that's all religious people are doing, finding material that justifies their predispositions so that when cornered, they have names and quotes to throw around.
bodaciousbw 6 days ago
Sadly, there are far more than 255 morons in the world. The 255 here just happened to stumble on this video, probably in talking to people that aren't morons.
hellomate639 6 days ago
And who in the hell is capable of evaluating brilliance anyway? Isn't that a subjective conclusion? Are you saying that because a brilliant man was catholic that Catholicism is right? So if Einstein was a Scientologist you'd be wearing an L Ron Hubbard shirt?
bodaciousbw 6 days ago
@bodaciousbw But he wouldn't.
perfectdark158 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bodaciousbw "Are you saying that because a brilliant man was catholic that Catholicism is right?" No, if you read what I wrote, I'm saying that if a brilliant man was a Theist, there is nothing inherently foolish or stupid about Theism. Try reading, it will improve the quality of your responses.
kmsoileau 6 days ago
You're pretty much saying you believe in god because other intelligent people do, that's ridiculous. I'm sure there are atheists out there because Carl Sagan was an atheist, but those people need to find critical thinking skill before they (you) even contemplate these questions
bodaciousbw 6 days ago
@bodaciousbw I said nothing of the kind. Here, read it again: "Wittgenstein was a devout Catholic." My implication was that there is nothing inherently foolish or stupid about Theism.
kmsoileau 6 days ago
@kmsoileau Arguing by authority is the very weakest kind of argument there is.
aluisious 6 days ago
Russell himself admitted that Wittgenstein was far more brilliant than he. Oh, by the way, Wittgenstein was a devout Catholic. What were you saying about Theism being a stupid belief?
kmsoileau 6 days ago
@kmsoileau Plenty of smart people can't drive worth a damn, I wouldn't ask them for driving lessons because they were a brain surgeon. It's hardly relevant if someone who is brilliant in one field believes something ridiculous in another.
aluisious 6 days ago
@aluisious "I wouldn't ask them for driving lessons because they were a brain surgeon." I see. You don't respect Wittgenstein's opinion on a question of philosophy because...wait for it...he was a philosopher!
Thanks for playing.
kmsoileau 6 days ago
@kmsoileau You want to explain how believing in something that has no evidence to support it is "philosophy?"
aluisious 6 days ago
@kmsoileau You think Wittgenstein knows anything more about his religious book than anyone else that has actually read it? Does his brilliance somehow shed light on an ancient piece of mashed-together literature, that you, your friends, family, and preacher are incapable of? No. Anyone that reads the book can find the internal inconsistencies. Anyone that reads the book, and other books can find the external inconsistencies. Anyone with half a mind rejects the book at that point.
Rytzch 6 days ago
@Rytzch Regarding the most important philosopher of the 20th century, with an estimated IQ of around 190, it's rational to assume he read it and understood what he was reading.
"Does his brilliance somehow shed light on an ancient piece of mashed-together literature, that you, your friends, family, and preacher are incapable of?" Does your mental mediocrity explain your inability to comprehend the Bible? Yes.
"Anyone with half a mind rejects the book at that point." Yes. You, for example.
kmsoileau 6 days ago
@kmsoileau You sound like you're mad that people are rejecting your religion. Why does that make you mad? If you believed it was true, it would be irrelevant what others thought of it.
aluisious 6 days ago
@kmsoileau You honestly have no idea what my IQ is, but you seem dead-set on keeping yourself in the lower end of the 2-digit category. If you cannot spot the obvious inconsistencies that your genius philosopher (i.e., practitioner of abstract thought... not exactly a powerhouse of reason) also was unable to, that's fine. The fact that they're there is well-documented. You can google search for it, and also google search for the verses in question. I await your apology.
Rytzch 5 days ago
@Rytzch "You honestly have no idea what my IQ is" I've got a pretty good idea, Forrest.
kmsoileau 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kmsoileau You're a clown, even if you admit to exaggerating there. I'm well above average, and even well above most people considered "smart". The fact that you cannot argue your point without resorting to argument from authority, and argumentum ad hominem shows me that you are incapable of understanding, and arguing for, your bible. Sorry for the delay, seems I missed the proper reply button.
Rytzch 4 days ago
@Rytzch You're a clown, even if you admit to exaggerating there. I'm well above average, and even well above most people considered "smart". The fact that you cannot argue your point without resorting to argument from authority, and argumentum ad hominem shows me that you are incapable of understanding, and arguing for, your bible.
Rytzch 4 days ago
Just so you know man, argument from authority is called argumentum ad verecundiam and is considered to be a legitimate inductive argument in some cases, not saying this is necessarily one of them, but just wanted to point that out
Asilaydyingfan15 3 days ago
@kmsoileau 'Russell himself admitted that Wittgenstein was far more brilliant than he.'
What you've got there is a logical fallacy; you're addressing the person not the argument, in this case it's an unqualified appeal to authority. If you want to make a point that Russell is wrong then you need to explain why.
catalyst8 5 days ago
@catalyst8 "What you've got there is a logical fallacy; you're addressing the person not the argument, in this case it's an unqualified appeal to authority."
Not really. The video I was responding to wasn't a reasoned argument, it was the presentation of an authority (Bertrand Russell). So I presented a counter-authority (Ludwig Wittgenstein). Further, I don't claim that Wittgenstein's being a Catholic proves Theism is right, only that Theism isn't stupid or foolish.
kmsoileau 5 days ago
@kmsoileau
Any philosophy which is not based on evidence (Empirical Evidence) is nonsense including religion, no matter how eloquently one defends it. Th fact is there is no evidence whatsoever about the existence of deity! Why any rational person believe in this irrational and foolish philosophy?
lachezar43 5 days ago
@lachezar43 "Any philosophy which is not based on evidence" Indeed? What is the evidence for your statement?
kmsoileau 5 days ago
@kmsoileau
Historical evidence and the experience of humanity in the last 300 years since the introduction of the greatest minds of this planet, who invented the Scientific Method. What is the evidence that science work? Look around you...
lachezar43 5 days ago
@lachezar43 The question isn't whether science works, the issue is your claim that "Any philosophy which is not based on evidence (Empirical Evidence) is nonsense" Where is your evidence of THAT claim?
kmsoileau 5 days ago
@kmsoileau
I answered your question. There is no philosophy, which I know of, to have provided so much advancements in our lives besides science. So, my statement that we do not know any philosophy introduced in previous epochs that really advances knowledge and is not based on evidence. It's just a fact. I might be wrong. I'll be most happy if you show me such philosophy and refute my argument.
lachezar43 5 days ago
@lachezar43 "I answered your question." Uh, no you didn't You claimed something was "nonsense." Now you're running away from a request for evidence that is is nonsense?
kmsoileau 5 days ago
@kmsoileau
I said it's nonsense because I Thought it is patently wrong... Why should anyone believe in philosophy which is not based on evidence? It is not rational to do so. My evidence that it is not rational is obvious - you could believe in virtually everything as long as it appears logically coherent. But any logic is based on premises. These premises interfere with our bias and ignorance! Science is not just a body of knowledge. It is a way of thinking it recognize this fallacy.
lachezar43 5 days ago
@lachezar43 Mathematics and logic itself are not based on evidence, yet your statement implies that they are nonsense. Ironic. LOL.
kmsoileau 5 days ago
@kmsoileau
It's nice you bring this up. I'm a physicist. Axioms which do not come from experiments are not science and nobody (except some mathematicians) consider them serious. Mathematics is just a tool that works. In the moments it stops working we'll discard it. Therefore our Application of mathematics is not based on pure ''faith'' but on evidence and experience! Our axioms as well ;) Read Richard Feynman's lectures on Electrodynamics. In the beginning he speaks a little about mathematics.
lachezar43 5 days ago
@lachezar43 I noticed you ignored the substance of my post. Logic itself does not come from experiments, but the scientific method is founded on it. LOL, thanks for the laugh!
kmsoileau 5 days ago
@kmsoileau
I'm sorry I didn't want to offend you. This symbol ;) isn't a laughter. But no matter. Please read a great book, that I hope will provide you immense pleasure - Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan. Then you will understand what scientific method is. I'm not arguing to abandon logic. But science is the Union of Logic and Experiments (Testing the logic). I only say that pure logical philosophies cannot gain knowledge about the world. This is why ultimately the Greek science failed!
lachezar43 5 days ago
@lachezar43 "Then you will understand what scientific method is." I don't need to read Sagan's book to know what the scientific method is. You need to read a book on logic to understand what logic is. Then you'll realize that logic is not based on evidence (meaning that the validity of logic is unaffected by the accumulation of evidence, thus is independent of evidence), and thus since logic is not "nonsense", there does indeed exist something not based on evidence, yet is not nonsense.
kmsoileau 5 days ago
@kmsoileau
How are they not based on evidence? Are you saying you can just make something up and say 'oh I got there through logical reasoning'?
EngeKomkommer 5 days ago
@EngeKomkommer Logic itself is what is not based on evidence.
kmsoileau 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kmsoileau Meaning is something that gives life worth i.e. what keeps you going. I'm not sure how I can make that any more clear. God does that for some, and for others rollerblading does it. It doesn't matter whether your fulfillment comes from recreation or a job or raising a family. Rollerblading is just one example, thus the inclusion of the ad infinitum at the end.
mma9900 6 days ago
Comment removed
mma9900 6 days ago
Put the question itself on the pedestal, come to the realization that the answer is irrelevant. We're along for the ride drifting both lazily and violently though the infinite expanse of a cosmic ocean asking each other why, that in itself is beautiful.
bodaciousbw 6 days ago
There IS something instead of nothing, evolution IS a thing, a religious god is definitely the product of our species' elementary attempts to make sense of our existence but the fact remains, we exist in spite of probability. 'it's the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it' all beliefs on either extreme answering the question of God are premature, both idealists and realists exist because the question still exists, the question still exists because we still exist
bodaciousbw 6 days ago 2
There you have it ladies and gentlemen. One of the two writers of Principia Mathmatica, and the most important philosopher of the 20th century and one of my personal heroes rejects God wholeheartedly.
xxFortunadoxx 1 week ago
OMG between 15-18 for me too! (although IM not yet 18)
assassin465 1 week ago
@assassin465 Don't spend too much time worrying about it. Make sure you study math.
aluisious 6 days ago
@aluisious Ummm okay. But why math?
assassin465 4 days ago
@assassin465 Math is necessary for science and engineering, which is always a good future. Believe me it's worse to be old and under-qualified than young and spending your time on math homework.
aluisious 4 days ago
Believing in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny are fun! They enhance existence! As an agnostic I feel a relationship with the idea of God is a beautiful addition to existence...even if that is a metaphorical relationship!
jimdivax 1 week ago
@jimdivax If you think about it, people lie their children about santa and that bunny thing to give them happiness. Believing in God is kind of like believing santa, it's happiness built upon a lie, because the scary truth of what happens when you die is very hard to accept for many.
warriorofguitar 1 week ago
@warriorofguitar The difference between believing in Santa and God is that God instructs people in the Holy Books to kill people for no good reason, and enforces a flawed morality in his many commandments (not just "the 10"). People kill over God because the holy books give them license. Nobody kills over Santa because a belief in him is not a dogmatic one and doesn't imply the many things that the Holy books do. In any case, I don't respect the reasoning of someone who believes in Santa either.
aWinkler2010 6 days ago
If there's no god, then we are all just smart animals and "intellectual integrity" and "honesty" are meaningless, artificial concepts used as tools to keep human behavior more predictable and easier to control.
kmsoileau 1 week ago
@kmsoileau Those concepts are only "meaningless" if you believe what is man made has no meaning/ or lesser value than something that is given by a god. However as a reductionist I feel there is no reason to get to this high level of abstraction to argue about the existance of a god when a rational individual can simply deduce the false nature of Religious doctrine. I am not saying all theists enjoy the smoke and mirrors of conceptual abstraction, but confusion does aid their argument.
chriswads 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@chriswads If there is no god, then man is just a smart animal and indeed "what is man made has no meaning" in exactly the same way that what is monkey-made or what is ant-made has no meaning. The rest of your post is just an attempt at distraction by introducing religion.
kmsoileau 1 week ago
@kmsoileau I understand what you're saying, but I don't think the absence of God dissolves the "meaning" of human ideas, concepts, and actions. If there is a higher power accompanied by an afterlife then certainly our actions might carry over into the next. But ignoring the speculative nature of guessing whether eating beans will cause us to go to hell, human creations (philosophy, art, science) give meaning to humanity and will exist as long as humanity does.
mma9900 1 week ago
@mma9900 "human creations (philosophy, art, science) give meaning to humanity" I'm sure you believe that human creations are somehow "special" and have "meaning", but if we are just animals, what does "meaning" mean?
kmsoileau 1 week ago
@kmsoileau Not even God could accurately explain what "meaning" means in less than 500 characters. I would not consider human creations special if bears had found a way to launch themselves into space or monkeys had built the Parthenon. But they haven't. One shits in the woods, the other throws shit at its friends. Certainly humans are capable of this but they are also capable of much more.
mma9900 1 week ago
@mma9900 "launch themselves into space" LOL So what? Chimps use tools. Does that mean their creation of tools have meaning? Yes, our accomplishments are impressive, and are more advanced than those of other animals. But if atheism is correct, we're still just animals. Deal with it.
kmsoileau 1 week ago
@kmsoileau I'm aware that I'm an animal. I share the same biological processes such as eating, sleeping, dieing, and the occasional mating ritual which takes place after I perform an elaborate dance. However, unlike the animal I can create with a purpose other than survival. Whether or not the creation is impressive is irrelevant. You need to read a happy poem or something. Calling everything meaningless would tend to make me depressed.
mma9900 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mma9900 "throws shit at its friends" Some humans ram their penises into the assholes of other males. What's your point?
kmsoileau 1 week ago
@kmsoileau "Certainly humans are capable of this..." Sometimes when I get angry and read I skip over things. I assume that's what happened in your case.
mma9900 1 week ago
@mma9900 I didn't miss anything. You simply are incapable of facing the stark implications of your atheism. Good luck with that.
kmsoileau 1 week ago
@kmsoileau Who ever said I was an atheist? I just don't think that in the absence of God everything is without meaning. Should I die and find myself being interrogated at the heavenly gates about all the times I got drunk in college, I won't suddenly think to myself, "Man, life really wasn't meaningless after all." Should the opposite occur whereby there is no heaven, I won't know any better. Good luck telling them atheists off!
mma9900 1 week ago
@mma9900 " I just don't think that in the absence of God everything is without meaning" LOL, fine, just explain how human animals have meaning and chimps don't.
kmsoileau 1 week ago
@kmsoileau I assume that you're prefacing your question on the hypothetical scenario of there being no God (thus the whole life is meaningless schtick). Chimps find meaning in survival (or throwing poop at zoo spectators). Humans find meaning in survival. They also find meaning in rollerblading, writing, painting, football, commenting on youtube, Christmas, protesting the establishment, and so on ad infinitum. Get my drift. Both find meaning, ours in a more complicated way.
mma9900 1 week ago
@kmsoileau Not a "distraction". A reductionist searches for the most basic level of knowledge, a bit like Descartes. If we conclude that there is no God, your argument becomes invalid and not worth having. For why speak of something that is given meaning by something that doesnt exist? Your point is valid to a point, but only by accepting things that are not true can it be completely valid, therefore it is not a discussion worth having. :) have a nice day though
chriswads 1 week ago
@kmsoileau Is that so hard to accept? And even if there was a god, we'd still be pretty meaningless, because god would be meaningless without a god. Hell, there's no meaning for the universe to even be here, it just is.
warriorofguitar 6 days ago
HIS WORDS , " BY THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN I WAS DONE MY REVUE OF CHRISTIANITY , AND DISCARDED WHAT WAS USELESS ", I'M AFRAID YOU CAN NEVER DISCARD ANY DOGMA YOU DONE A 13 YEAR STUDY ON.YOUR ALREADY INFECTED. AS FAR AS NOT BELIEVING IN AFTERLIFE , IN THE END ALL OF US GO INTO DEATH WITH RELIEF , BROUGHT BY HOPE .HOPE THAT IT'S THERE.
GIANFRANCO FRONZI. JANUARY . 24 /12
9493760 1 week ago
Rest in hell
Nacirema6969 1 week ago
@Nacirema6969 - You might as well say, "Rest on unicorns".
TrollLowLow 1 week ago
@TrollLowLow This old coot believed in god, a catholic priest made him reject his own atheistic beliefs and said all atheists are illogical. He knows there is a god he called himself an agnostic to avoid embarrassment he was a coward.
Nacirema6969 1 week ago
@Nacirema6969 - Certainly, you have a name of this priest who "made him reject his own atheistic beliefs"? I mean, we're not talking about the Inquisition here, as Russell died in 1970, and his life was among the most chronicled of the 20th Century.
Who was this priest that you claim to be responsible for Russell's conversion?
TrollLowLow 1 week ago
@TrollLowLow Frederick Copleston
Nacirema6969 1 week ago
@Nacirema6969 Hell is no more real, that Santa's Naughty list. If you think different, then you are a moron.
lowtalkerr 1 week ago
@lowtalkerr If you aren't a christian then you know nothing about philosophy or natural science. You don't believe what you can't see with your eyes, just think of all the millions of particles that make up your body that you cannot see. You may be infested with parasite yet believe you are completely healthy, 40% of americans have pin worms. If outside of the USA look it up yourself.
Nacirema6969 1 week ago
@Nacirema6969 That makes no sense at all, why would being a Christian give me a deeper knowledge of Philosophy and natural science?! lol. I have read the Bible though, so essentially my "christian" knowledge is on par with most Christians. But yeah, i still don't get your point...........at all.
lowtalkerr 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lowtalkerr Yep you're a child aren't you? You aren't listening to a word i am saying. I never said being a christian would make you smarter. If you were smart you would be a christian. Being an atheist is illogical. Look up Bertrand Russel vs Frederick Copleston.
Nacirema6969 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lowtalkerr "I have read the Bible though, so essentially my "christian" knowledge is on par with most Christians."
I think you give too much credit to 'most christians'.
Skindoggiedog 1 week ago
@Nacirema6969 "If you aren't a christian then you know nothing about philosophy or natural science."
Visit Earth sometime if you get the chance.
Skindoggiedog 1 week ago
@Skindoggiedog I'll be sure to when i'm an angel and you're in hell :)
Nacirema6969 1 week ago
Elaine Grand. Good job.
saglek 1 week ago
if you actually think, you will reject the nonsense of a god
IdentifiedInfidel 1 week ago
Bertrand Russell was a stud. He highlights perfectly how detached religion is from an honest pursuit of truth (or at least the very best we can manage at discovering truth). It always amazes me how often religious people appeal to "social benefits" as an argument or reason to believe it. It's utterly irrelevant. Believe something only if you think it is TRUE! They love to throw the word (truth) around so much, yet they seem to have an utter lack of respect for it.
Tibberclaw 1 week ago
Bertrand Russell bloody legend
holyhoploc 1 week ago
Russell couldn't even comprehend the mind of Nietzsche, it's foolish to think he could comprehend the mind of God.
"You say that I am wise, but the truth is God only is wise; and in this oracle he means to say that the wisdom of men is little or nothing." ~Socrates.
eleutheromaniac 1 week ago
@DaFox28: Do you ever read what you write? I can't respond to a string of non-sequiturs.
DAngelo136 1 week ago
@DAngelo136 Does your mother ever think before going home with random men from bars? I cannot respond to a string of co-signers.
DaFoxx28 1 week ago
@DaFoxx28 So in other words: no. They say "on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog", well in your case, a monkey tapping keys at random would make more sense than you. Look pal, If you're going to attempt to play the dozens, at least try to be entertaining, "Yo mama" jokes are really droll. It shows that you have a underdeveloped intellect that cannot express itself adequately. Seek help.
DAngelo136 1 week ago
@DAngelo136 = mother plays defensive end for the 49 ers, wish her luck on their superbowl run
DaFoxx28 1 week ago
@DaFoxx28 Get better material or get lost.
DAngelo136 1 week ago
@DAngelo136 = Burp
DaFoxx28 1 week ago
@DaFoxx28 I see you must be a little boy who's got access to a computer. Tell you what I'm going to do since you are a troll. I'm going to just ignore your monkey mail. You see, you're just like a monkey in the cage that flings dung and screeches, but you're still a monkey in a cage. So monk, this is my last response to you. Don't forget to wash your hands before handling food, or you might get sick and die. Which would be a boon to mankind.
DAngelo136 1 week ago
@DAngelo136 Hey, Tonto, aka onewarriordragoons side-kick. Go wipe your grannys ass, she needs it. I got more than access to a computer. I have full access to your mothers CPU with my HARD drive boy, now read it and weep, ya weak sheep. Ok run along Dangeload. : )
DaFoxx28 1 week ago
@DaFoxx28 Seriously, read a book.
You are smart enough to write complete words, but not smart enough to come up with complete thoughts.
Home schooling- apparently, has it's limitations- dumb parents-dumber kids.
OneWarmDragon 1 week ago